If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the forum FAQ and the House Rules and Forum Guidelines.
You will have to register before you can post. If you find your registration is rejected, please try again using a different username. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Suggestions for future versions
Individual ideas on one subject should still be posted in the wishlist thread, however if you want to discuss your idea with others please create your own thread. Please name your topics sensibly and give an indication of what it is about.
For general ideas or a list please use this Wishlist topic. You can view some older suggestions here

Open goal experiment

I have a query and would like to perform an experiment if you could help me. If we have ever come across open goal misses on FM, it is obviously infuriating. If a human misses them IRL, they're human, but when a computer controlled avatar misses them, it just doesn't seem right. Obviously IRL you can see whether the player was off balance, whether the ball bobbled, or whether he lost his footing. Obviously we aren't privy to this kinda evidence of FM.

So I would like to ask if ppl could post screenshots of missed by open goal chances by both human and AI players. I would like to get an idea of how often this occurs. I know it happens more often than it should, but I am more interested to see how often the AI misses these kinda chances. It would also be interesting to view the player attributes for these misses too.

I've seen them for both AI and human teams on various versions of FM. I actually seen one earlier this week on a game I'm currently playing on FM10. I havent actually seen one on FM12 yet though, but to be fair I havent played it a lot yet.

The open goal situation I refered to earlier was litereally an open goal made froma speedy counter attack whereby my striker had already rounded the keeper around 15 yards out and still missed! I also remember seeing the computer do it as Liverpool for against me, one of their players missed a certain goal from about 10-15 yards out in FM 2009, I was really counting my blessings then! It really does happen in the game as it does in real life.

Google "worst open goal misses" and you'll get 74,400,000 hits, just saying

Originally Posted by bullybeef

If a human misses them IRL, they're human, but when a computer controlled avatar misses them, it just doesn't seem right. Obviously IRL you can see whether the player was off balance, whether the ball bobbled, or whether he lost his footing. Obviously we aren't privy to this kinda evidence of FM.

Just in case you missed what I said. I does occur IRL, but it just looks either silly, dishonest, or both, on a PC.

No? Well you can say it "looks silly" when the computer misses if you want but first of all the match engine is woefully simple. Secondly, the "little computer avatar men" are attempting to emulate real life play. So why shouldnt they miss similar opportunities?

No? Well you can say it "looks silly" when the computer misses if you want but first of all the match engine is woefully simple. Secondly, the "little computer avatar men" are attempted to emulate real life play. So why shouldnt they miss similar opportunities?

Just in case you missed what I said. I does occur IRL, but it just looks either silly, dishonest, or both, on a PC.

So are you saying the players in FM should never miss easy chances? So at what point would you limit the ME in terms of mistakes from players? Would you take them all out? Or only the ones that have annoyed you?

So are you saying the players in FM should never miss easy chances? So at what point would you limit the ME in terms of mistakes from players? Would you take them all out? Or only the ones that have annoyed you?

I think the point is granting the human player some level of achievement here. If a chance as clear as an open goal, with a player in question whom is capable based upon his attributes to score the opportunity, then whom will it hurt if he scores? Creating chances is the hard part, especially chances like that, and if you've played football at a decent level, scoring is the easy part. Why is it such a problem if he score especially if you've made the effort to create such a clear chance? Where's the reward?

Plus, if it is a matter of odds based upon differing variables, then Bellamy wouldn't hit the woodwork from there in 9/10 chances, he'd either miss completely or score. There's a big difference between missing completely and hitting a 5 inch diameter metal bar from 8 yards. So in this sense there is more chance he would score than hit the bar.

Anyways, we're missing the point of the thread, I only asked if people could post examples of these kinda misses, by both the human and AI player, to see if there is a balance, and how often it occurs. Plus if there is anyone who knows their odds, what would be the chances of these kinda misses occurring? For example Bellamy missing an open goal and hitting the bar from that kinda position? Yeah it occurs IRL, but I am sure more goals have been scored by the attacking team in open goal situations too.

I think the point is granting the human player some level of achievement here. If a chance as clear as an open goal, with a player in question whom is capable based upon his attributes to score the opportunity, then whom will it hurt if he scores? Creating chances is the hard part, especially chances like that, and if you've played football at a decent level, scoring is the easy part. Why is it such a problem if he score especially if you've made the effort to create such a clear chance? Where's the reward?

Plus, if it is a matter of odds based upon differing variables, then Bellamy wouldn't hit the woodwork from there in 9/10 chances, he'd either miss completely or score. There's a big difference between missing completely and hitting a 5 inch diameter metal bar from 8 yards. So in this sense there is more chance he would score than hit the bar.

Anyways, we're missing the point of the thread, I only asked if people could post examples of these kinda misses, by both the human and AI player, to see if there is a balance, and how often it occurs. Plus if there is anyone who knows their odds, what would be the chances of these kinda misses occurring? For example Bellamy missing an open goal and hitting the bar from that kinda position? Yeah it occurs IRL, but I am sure more goals have been scored by the attacking team in open goal situations too.

Scoring is the easy part? Are you sure on that?

Anyway, you seem to be suggesting that players in FM should never miss these chances, but of course they should otherwise its not replicating a game of football at all. Chances are 9 times out of 10 Bellamy (in game) puts that in the back of the net, but since you cannot replicate the situation another 9 times its impossible to tell, but i think by the lack of responces so far providing any evidence its safe to say that players in FM dont miss that many open goals. There are plenty of posters online now who would love to back you up.

This isn't an argument, as much as you'd like it to be, it's just out of interest. I'm sure SI would like to know how often empty goal chances are missed. Why wouldn't they? If it occurs more often against the human player, I think that is worth noting. I am not saying it does, which is why I am asking.

Also, open goal misses IRL live long in the conciousness because of the nature of the miss, but open goals that are scored, are just an easy chances, and are rarely recalled. If someone is trying telling me people miss open goal chances more often than they score, then you're having a laugh.

And as I just said elsewhere, are we saying when FM players miss, they're meant to miss, in order simulate RL events? Mmmm controversial. Are we suggesting the ME cheats?!

I think the point is granting the human player some level of achievement here. If a chance as clear as an open goal, with a player in question whom is capable based upon his attributes to score the opportunity, then whom will it hurt if he scores? Creating chances is the hard part, especially chances like that, and if you've played football at a decent level, scoring is the easy part. Why is it such a problem if he score especially if you've made the effort to create such a clear chance? Where's the reward?

Plus, if it is a matter of odds based upon differing variables, then Bellamy wouldn't hit the woodwork from there in 9/10 chances, he'd either miss completely or score. There's a big difference between missing completely and hitting a 5 inch diameter metal bar from 8 yards. So in this sense there is more chance he would score than hit the bar.

There's no logic in the above, I'm afraid.

Are you seriously suggesting that because you've created a goodish chance, it is only fair that it should always be converted if the player has a good shooting attribute, meaning no player above a certain level will ever miss?

Or that hitting the bar should never happen as it is difficult to hit?

This isn't an argument, as much as you'd like it to be, it's just out of interest. I'm sure SI would like to know how often empty goal chances are missed. Why wouldn't they? If it occurs more often against the human player, I think that is worth noting. I am not saying it does, which is why I am asking.

Also, open goal misses IRL live long in the conciousness because of the nature of the miss, but open goals that are scored, are just an easy chances, and are rarely recalled. If someone is trying telling me people miss open goal chances more often than they score, then you're having a laugh.

And as I just said elsewhere, are we saying when FM players miss, they're meant to miss, in order simulate RL events? Mmmm controversial. Are we suggesting the ME cheats?!

Players miss in FM for many reasons. None of those are a "cheating ME".

There seems to be a fear in saying that the ME is premeditated. If it makes calculations based upon variables which are made at super fast speed before the fact, that's premeditated. If a calculated process has occurred before the action, that's premeditated. I don't understand why it such a touchy subject?

Whether I know the ME is premeditated is a fact or not, I'll still enjoy playing the game, because I have always suspected it, how else would a simulated football match model come to any in game conclusions if it didn't calculate them before the fact. Or has SI built a computer model that can break the laws of linear time, and make decisions in the present??

The ME plays out the game before you see it. It has to for the highlights viewer to work. It cannot display match highlights if it doesn't know where they are.

However, that doesn't mean you can't change things. Every time you make a tactical change, the match is recalculated. That means the full game still operates in real time for the user, bar the minor delay when making tactical changes during a highlight, which cannot activate until it has finished.

I think you have me wrong, wwfan, I don't think there's anything wrong with the fact the ME calculates and pre-determines events, how else would it do it?

All I am trying to highlight is IRL, a player, or in this case, a striker, doesn't pre-determine whether he may miss or whether he may score, he will think he will score. He isn't controlled by variables until he's in the present. Unlike a computer that can pre-determine what options the present may bring using super fast processes, including changes that the AI or user may change.

I think you have me wrong, wwfan, I don't think there's anything wrong with the fact the ME calculates and pre-determines events, how else would it do it?

All I am trying to highlight is IRL, a player, or in this case, a striker, doesn't pre-determine whether he may miss or whether he may score, he will think he will score. He isn't controlled by variables until he's in the present. Unlike a computer that can pre-determine what options the present may bring using super fast processes, including changes that the AI or user may change.

It happens in real time in the ME, via multiple calculations per second. There's nothing predetermined about why he does or doesn't score. He might be super confident, resulting in his trying to do too much with a difficult to control ball. He might snatch an easier chance because he's nervous. He might strike it perfectly, but an inch too high. He might put it in the back of the net.

There are so many reasons as to why he does or doesn't score, just as there might be in real life.

Open goal misses happen extremely rarely in my games.
Wouldn't have thought is was a big enough issue for these pages.
My favourite real life open goal miss was one many years ago by Derby striker Roger Davies (against Chelsea I think, anyway Derby were playing in a strange colour away strip) where he rounded the goalkeeper beautifully & put it wide from a yard out.

But the ME player isn't real, it's a computer controlled avatar - for both sides. Making up excuses that why he misses, like we do IRL, really cannot come into it, because it's a simulation. It isn't RL, as much as we wish it to be, and the irony is, when we see a computer controlled avatar miss, it looks odd, because we know it was was controlled by an electronic process, not God or luck.

You develop the game, surely you know this.

As my wife persistently says to me: "It isn't real!" - but knowing and understanding this doesn't stop me from playing, because FM is the very best of a very bad bunch of footy sim games in today's market.

I think I would have more relieved if people had just laughed at the miss rather than try to explain it, because it was a shocker. I was hoping to see some others just for the humour value, not to discredit the game.

Well not really, your OP was looking to back up your claim of a problem (based on the previous thread to this one), to which no one has backed you up, so now you have decided its a joke thread. It was never started as a joke thread, even if you now claim it.

Well not really, your OP was looking to back up your claim of a problem (based on the previous thread to this one), to which no one has backed you up, so now you have decided its a joke thread. It was never started as a joke thread, even if you now claim it.

Erm, no, remember you want an argument, I just wanted to know whether it was common. And if it isn't common, it must be just me then, I guess. No biggy. Remember, it's not real, it's a game.

I’ve had a look at the PMK and the Bellamy chance. The chance isn’t as clear as you think it is, let me try and show you why.

Notice Bellamy’s position when the move starts (He’s the player circled). He has a lot of work to do and ground to make up before he even gets on the end of the move.

Now let’s skip onto the bit where the OP is a little confused and can’t understand why the chance was missed as it was an open goal.

This is the exact moment Gerrad puts the cross in. Look at Bellamy (circled player again) and where he is stood. Now for the area where Gerrard is about to cross the ball Bellamy is not only to advanced but he’s got to get back into an area to get on the end of the ball. Now this is where the problem stems from of why it’s missed.

Now if you look at that screenshot you can see what the issue is when the ball is crossed. The ball is behind Bellamy and he’s facing the wrong way. The ball is travelling fast and high. Now Bellamy must shift his body and try and get in to a position so he can get on the end of the chance.

The above screen shows you Bellamy who’s just about to strike the ball as it’s crossed into him. This is the exact moment before impact. His body is still turning and his foot is trailing behind him which he is going to use to strike it. Now remember the ball is travelling across goal at speed and quite high. Bellamy decides to hit it first time while it’s still positioned high. He doesn’t allow the ball to drop he just hits it.

As you can see on the screenshot his left leg is still behind the ball and not in front of it. If he was facing the ball direct they’d be no question about how easy the shot should be. But he’s always behind the ball and not at the best angle to begin with.

The ball is at the wrong angle the whole time and it was never in his favour. He’s actually lucky that he managed to get it on goal in the first place because the way it’s positioned as he’s striking it, it could have gone anywhere.

Reversed Touchline is the best angle to view the clip on. If you watch this angle of the whole clip you’ll see that it was not an easy chance. It was difficult and would have been a quality goal if it had gone in.

Now I’m not sure what his attributes are like on your game but on mine he isn’t all that clever. I mean he has 13 agility and balance both which are needed for the swivel he had to do and turn his body quick. And he did have a lot of work to do with getting his body back inline. He also has 13 for concentration and anticipation both again needed to stay focused for the cross. Normally these attributes would be good enough if the chance was easy. And as he was attempting a volley he needs excellent first touch and technique. And his technique is low it’s only 12 on my game. His first touch of 14 is enough though.

I don’t class it as an easy chance missed viewing it back several times. It was a difficult chance and he was always on the back foot really and positioned all wrong. He did well to get it on target imo

It’s probably not what you wanted to hear but thought I’d give you my views anyways

Thanks Cleon, great commentary! LFC could do with you at IRL now if you can defend that! Even the in match commentary thought he was going to score (I missed that bit).

So you're telling me, if that was a RL event, it wouldn't have gone on the empty goal bloopers compilation? You went to all that effort, for what? I don't get it. Obviously, if you deeply believe that elements of the game really do simulate RL events, which you quite scarily do (I think you should see go and someone about that), I concede it would have been a great goal if it was a couple if inches lower. I just watched it again from behind the goal and it was a great effort, though. Shame.

Anways I won the game.....but I can't shake this feeling that this whole process of your time was simply for the purposes to belittle? But why would you do that?

Thanks Cleon, great commentary! LFC could do with you at IRL now if you can defend that! Even the in match commentary thought he was going to score (I missed that bit).

So you're telling me, if that was a RL event, it wouldn't have gone on the empty goal bloopers compilation? You went to all that effort, for what? I don't get it. Obviously, if you deeply believe that elements of the game really do simulate RL events, which you quite scarily do (I think you should see go and someone about that), I concede it would have been a great goal if it was a couple if inches lower. I just watched it again from behind the goal and it was a great effort, though. Shame.

But the fact is you mock me now I've explained in detail how yours wasn't a bad miss and you've got no comeback so now you resort to mocking. Well played. At least mock after you've gone into details as to why I'm wrong and not just say I am. Put effort into posts to disprove soemthing that happens

Anways I won the game.....but I can't shake this feeling that this whole process of your time was simply for the purposes to belittle? But why would you do that?

How was I belittling you? I just gave you feedback that's all. The other misses in the thread I can't explain as they are really bad misses. However yours is not a sitter nor is it an easy chance. I was just giving you feedback based on other posts you'd done in another thread and this same chance.

Who mentioned three yards? I said 6 without even viewing the clip, so I wasn't far off. That's a difficult chance?? It's harder to actually hit the woodwork, which he did. If open goal misses come down to a matter of opinion, then we've got no chance. An open goal is what it is; if a human misses them, they're human, when a computer control avatar misses them, it's so dodgy.

You thought it was an easy chance based on that quote which you did earlier today.

Yours wasn't a bad miss, I was just making sure you and whoever else use this thread can distinguish between a bad miss which can't be explained and the scenario like you posted which is explainable.

That's not me defending the game. That's me knowing what is a real issue and what is one created by someones lack of understanding regarding the situation.

Who said that? I didn't say you were defending the game, but seeing as though you are clearly a good defender, what's your price, I need a decent CB!

Originally Posted by Cleon

How was I belittling you? I just gave you feedback that's all.

Just ignore me, Cleon, you see when you're disabled, it's easy to feel a little paranoid and the feeling of belittlement (although usually, I get this feeling when people actually see me....how strange), especially when it maybe said someone may come across as righteous, and especially when you went to so much trouble, even though it was a little off topic mind. I did presume when you pmed me, you were privately going to advise me further regarding this incident....I wasn't aware I was in for a public flogging!

And I hope you aren't going to run the gamut on every missed empty net. I am sure every man (and his dog) has an opinion on these misses, but I didn't really require one. He missed, I won, it didn't really make any difference. And it really wasn't the point of the thread. As I posted twice, I just wanted to see how often these kinda things occur, not really why they occur. There's not much we can do about it, apart from accept it, and maybe we could find some humour in them.

If a human misses them IRL, they're human, but when a computer controlled avatar misses them, it just doesn't seem right.

So what you're saying, is that, as a computer controlled avatar, the "player" should never miss?

Perhaps the goalkeeper should have predicted the cross and been in position to save, using his AI logic.

In fact, in the screenshot above, Gerrard should have just shot the ball. He's using AI, so he could just target the 2.067 square metres of goal that's greater then or equal to the maximum reach of the goalkeeper, knowing that the keeper is 1.86 metres tall and can launch himself with 1952.903 Newtons of force at an angle of 62.5 degrees above horizontal.

Of course, a human can't do this, but these aren't humans! Sort it out!

So what you're saying, is that, as a computer controlled avatar, the "player" should never miss?

Perhaps the goalkeeper should have predicted the cross and been in position to save, using his AI logic.

In fact, in the screenshot above, Gerrard should have just shot the ball. He's using AI, so he could just target the 2.067 square metres of goal that's greater then or equal to the maximum reach of the goalkeeper, knowing that the keeper is 1.86 metres tall and can launch himself with 1952.903 Newtons of force at an angle of 62.5 degrees above horizontal.

Of course, a human can't do this, but these aren't humans! Sort it out!

He should also know the trajectory to hit the ball to bounce it off the post and to spin back into the net.

I watched football for over 30 years, and never use trigonometry and geometry to rationalise misses. I frequently visit football forums and if Bells missed that chance, the supporters would have gone crazy. And as a fan, I'm obviously going to be biased because I want good chances to go in. It is starting to seem that if one opinion strays from the majority, you are lynched on here. Yet football in general is all about opinions. How odd.

And 50 posts in now and only 2 people have understood the thread and posted examples! What has got on ppls goat with this thread? Talk about touchy. If I've hit a nerve somewhere, I apologise. I just wanted to see examples of similar misses, which I said at the top of the page, that's all. I think they are ridiculously funny, after you get over the initial shock of the miss. My OP screenshot was an example, I didn't think it would to be scrutinized. I just thought he should have scored, but it's a computer game and he missed. I thought it would have given ppl a laugh. Being the positive person I am, I'm much prefer to analyse the goals, not the misses.

Perhaps i can help you figure out why seemingly no one is taking your side on this issue (assuming there are even "sides" to an "issue" here).

It could be the persistent contradictions, such as:

Originally Posted by bullybeef

Being the positive person I am, I'm much prefer to analyse the goals, not the misses.

Originally Posted by bullybeef

I am more interested to see how often the AI misses these kinda chances.

Then you comment that you're being belittled, not before saying this to a moderator:

Originally Posted by bullybeef

if you deeply believe that elements of the game really do simulate RL events, which you quite scarily do (I think you should see go and someone about that)

If you can take a shot at someone, don't moan when they choose to fire back!

If you meant for this thread to be funny, you should try a little harder to convey that message at the start. Specifically, you shouldn't use the word "infuriating" to describe the game situation you're asking us to upload, as it removes any doubt that there is a negative motive to your request.

If you want my opinion about why this happens, i think the game simply calculates the percent chance of the shot going on target based on whatever factors SI have put into the engine. It will NEVER offer a 100% chance of the shot going on target, nor will it ever provide a 0% chance for any situation. Your given situation, even at 97%, still misses 3 out of 100 times. If the game's random number generator happens to catch the 3% chance of a miss, the match engine will show you a missed shot. I don't think it literally fires a ball at a stick figure and sees which angle it flys off; the number generator and probabilities are more likely to me.

(Side note: i created a debatably popular basketball game for TI-86 calculators when i was in high school, and the best way i could simulate passing/scoring/etc, was to use probability and a random number generator, so it just makes sense to me that it is what this match engine would use it as well, but in an obviously more intricate way than my crappy game!)

Cleon, while there is no issue with players missing easy chances and the odd open goal going begging (I love this tbh), let's not pretend that was anything other than a simple chance for a professional striker who has played many games at the highest level.

Interesting analysis Cleon, for me i think the fact that its a volley, rather than passing into the goal, makes it a more difficult chance and not an easy one. Although i'd have been annoyed if a more techinally gifted player had missed that.

Cleon, while there is no issue with players missing easy chances and the odd open goal going begging (I love this tbh), let's not pretend that was anything other than a simple chance for a professional striker who has played many games at the highest level.

It's a sitter missed, nothing more, and the game is better for it!

It is by no means a cast iron chance. Certainly a good one, but, according to research on chance conversion, it would be borderline as to whether it was considered one that should be converted more than not. In real life of course, the keeper would be much further across his goal, which would make it tougher. The main bugs in the chance are keeper positioning and the lack of willingness for the Liverpool players to get between the posts for the cross, not the missed conversion.

It is by no means a cast iron chance. Certainly a good one, but, according to research on chance conversion, it would be borderline as to whether it was considered one that should be converted more than not. In real life of course, the keeper would be much further across his goal, which would make it tougher. The main bugs in the chance are keeper positioning and the lack of willingness for the Liverpool players to get between the posts for the cross, not the missed conversion.

Two things sprang to mind, Gomes' totall lack of reaction, and Bale beforehand when Gerrard gets the ball to cross it in. He gets there comfortably first seeing the danger from Gerrard, but then makes no attempt to boot it into touch. Dont know if this is an in game error from Bale, or an ME or animation issue. But I would have thought he would have put that out for a corner. In real life i would have expected him to put that straight out as he has little room to turn and make an up pitch clearance.

Not an open goal but I think the following clips does show up where the current tactical instruction system fails.

As a brief overview I'm looking to close out a 2-0 win so my team is set to a 'very fluid' 'counter' style with short passing, default CF & more roaming with very low tempo.

The player [Wright] who spurns the chance is set as an attacking defensive forward with all sliders set to the grey default position expect for 'run from deep' which is set at 'sometimes', his role has a primary default function of providing chances for other players which in this instance has resulted in an excellent goal scoring chance going begging.

What I do not understand is why after losing his marker would he choose to play low percentage reverse angle pass instead of choosing to bear down on goal in the gap that has been created as this has a much lower degree of difficulty & a much higher probability of success? Even the other CB who is closing down the gap presents a low risk as his momentum makes him easy to beat with a move to his left side.

Gerrard was free in the PA, 12 yrds out, slightly to the right of the Pen Spot. Ball comes to him slowly from the right, and facing the direction of the ball, he passes it 30 yrds back out of the PA with his weaker foot to no one, rather than turning and striking it with his good foot towards the near post. Obviously that won't go down on the stats as a chance, but it was a glaring one.

Tenuous link as the goal was an easy tap-in but it shows another common problem with the current ME.

The chap in goal is Germany's #1 & he's set as an attacking sweeper keeper, despite his undoubted ability rather than attack the wide open space to gather up the low flighted cross he runs away from what would be an easy catch back to his line & gives the forward an easy tap-in.

I might add that I'm on a run of inexplicable results with defenders making rare mistakes to give away late goals or penalties & all of a sudden my players are struggling to hit a barn door from 2 yards so this might all just be sour grapes on my part.

Tenuous link as the goal was an easy tap-in but it shows another common problem with the current ME.

The chap in goal is Germany's #1 & he's set as an attacking sweeper keeper, despite his undoubted ability rather than attack the wide open space to gather up the low flighted cross he runs away from what would be an easy catch back to his line & gives the forward an easy tap-in.

I might add that I'm on a run of inexplicable results with defenders making rare mistakes to give away late goals or penalties & all of a sudden my players are struggling to hit a barn door from 2 yards so this might all just be sour grapes on my part.

Not sure if its an issue, or an error on his part, but he doesnt recognise the threat early. In fairness it is a superb ball into that "corridor of uncertainly" but for him to claim it, he needs to be moving incredibly early, almost before the ball crosses the edge of the 18 yard box. Still think sweeper keepers need some work, so maybe it isnt sour grapes

If you actually look at the position he initially takes up the ball trajectory takes it right into his hands, making the extra movement to his line is a killer & then doing nothing once the cross was put in ended all hope.

Like you say it was a well picked out cross & run though.

Edit: Not sure about the corridor of uncertainly though, that really needs defenders running towards goal to make it work.

Edit 2: Missed the fact you were taking about him sweeping up the through ball, not sure he ever had a chance but that is due to his starting position being incorrect for the role that has been assigned to him.

When the pass to the winger was made he was standing on the penalty spot whereas as a sweeper keeper behind a high defensive line (tactical changes had not taken effect, another annoyance) he should have been a good 10 yards outside the area & maybe even a little to his left as that was the side the ball was on in the attacking third.

Somewhat annoyingly he was the correct distance out about 10 seconds earlier having just taken a free-kick.

I see things like those every game. I keep banging on about the ME being horrifically poor but that is because some of the decisions players make on the game. I'm in a save now and my defenders are actually making me angry lol. I don't understand why they are making decisions a 5 year old kid would make. What am I doing in player instructions for them to do this? I have no clue. 'Lower creative freedom so your defenders do this', help like that etc. bemuses me. I literally want to tell my defenders to close down but not stupidly. Yes I want you to press but not two players on the same player and leaving a man free! That is just one instance. There are a million more and anybody who says they don't have them either don't understand defending or are bllnd to it through their denial of the ME having those type of faults.

As someone who watches the full match I could spend all day putting together highlight packages of odd decision making in each & every game, I'm just pleased that those who matter have decided that a major overhaul is needed.

Totally agree Barside. The whole dynamic of tactics into the ME are so disjointed and out of sync. I think the sliders need to go somehow. Me giving my defenders an idea of when to close down through sliders doesn't tell them to pivot or not. I mean, pivot defending is the basis of defending that this game doesn't understand. Also, players not cutting out passing lanes is so annoying. I just question the ppl who say it doesn't happen.

I too use the TC, with minor adjustments, it still doesn't make the decision making better.

Tenuous link as the goal was an easy tap-in but it shows another common problem with the current ME.

The chap in goal is Germany's #1 & he's set as an attacking sweeper keeper, despite his undoubted ability rather than attack the wide open space to gather up the low flighted cross he runs away from what would be an easy catch back to his line & gives the forward an easy tap-in.

I might add that I'm on a run of inexplicable results with defenders making rare mistakes to give away late goals or penalties & all of a sudden my players are struggling to hit a barn door from 2 yards so this might all just be sour grapes on my part.

Funny you're discussing GKs, I've just viewed a reserve game, were my players were taking on a very low strength team, but in this occasion, the away keeper decided to run towards where he thought a low cross was going, but when it deflected off one of his defenders, and back to my player, he carried on running completely away from the goal leaving it totally unguarded for a simple tap in. It was inexplicable.

If you actually look at the position he initially takes up the ball trajectory takes it right into his hands, making the extra movement to his line is a killer & then doing nothing once the cross was put in ended all hope.

Like you say it was a well picked out cross & run though.

Edit: Not sure about the corridor of uncertainly though, that really needs defenders running towards goal to make it work.

Edit 2: Missed the fact you were taking about him sweeping up the through ball, not sure he ever had a chance but that is due to his starting position being incorrect for the role that has been assigned to him.

When the pass to the winger was made he was standing on the penalty spot whereas as a sweeper keeper behind a high defensive line (tactical changes had not taken effect, another annoyance) he should have been a good 10 yards outside the area & maybe even a little to his left as that was the side the ball was on in the attacking third.

Somewhat annoyingly he was the correct distance out about 10 seconds earlier having just taken a free-kick.

Yep, this is where I personally think there is an issue with Sweeper keepers. I could be wrong though, but that's my feeling.

In my book you're spot on & it's due to another common problem with FM in that FB/WB all too often drift inside, I actually had them set to tightly man mark yet the LB gave up far too much space to the winger & my CB's would have been given a proper dressing down for being caught ball watching alas the game will not let me focus on individual defensive lapses which is something I've mentioned in the past.

In my book you're spot on & it's due to another common problem with FM in that FB/WB all too often drift inside, I actually had them set to tightly man mark yet the LB gave up far too much space to the winger & my CB's would have been given a proper dressing down for being caught ball watching alas the game will not let me focus on individual defensive lapses which is something I've mentioned in the past.

Would love to have that as an option. Definitely deserve a dressing down.

Its a good goal on their part, but how good defensively is your fullback, looks like he lost concentration, while the winger just dropped a couple of yards off him, which was all he need as he turned and reacted quicker than your full back.

To act in his defence the guy out wide (a striker I sold 2 years ago ) had only just come on so getting done for pace is not a disgrace as he was/is lightning over 5 yards so I could forgive him initially dropping off (not that the ME can replicate this level of independent thought by the player) but to create the space by drifting inside is illogical.

As I said further up this gaol was as a result of HSV pushing up to get the equaliser & my changes to be more conservative were still sitting in a pending status which is a major flaw in the ME, intelligent players should be more reactive to tactical changes by the opposition & the certainly shouldn't blindly wait until I tell them to tighten up at the back or compact the midfield to deny space.

I actually think it was Geoff Boycott who first used it in respect to deliveries wide of off stump, do you stay safe & leave it or take a swing at it & risk a nick to the slips?

Yeah I'm pretty sure it came from cricket.

But on the goal, i agree not sure what he is doing running inside (trying to block the delivery maybe? which he hugely failed at anyway), he should be trying hustle him all the way. Although he looks fairly beaten regardless.

It kinda looks like the issue is during the first phase of the move, if you pause it on 9 seconds you can see the guy on the bottom of the screen completely free and it kinda seems like your left back is watching him, the obvious pass is to that player not the one the opp ends up making that takes out your entire back line, which i must say is very very high up the pitch, your centre backs are also a few yards deeper than the full backs and it gives that player the yard of space he needs. I dont really think, unless your keeper is a track sprinter, he would ever get to that its going out too wide. From there its just a case of him not expecting the kind of cross thats coming in, if he stays on his 6 yard box and its a high cross it prob goes over his head, if its a low cross he gets it. An annoying goal to lose, but i dont think its the keepers fault as such.

If a ball goes across your defence like that and the goalkeeper leaves it, he gets dropped for the next game. In this game, it wouldn't be percieved as a mistake, it'd simply go down as a good goal. That's what they need to work on in the next ME, screening things like that out if possible.

It kinda looks like the issue is during the first phase of the move, if you pause it on 9 seconds you can see the guy on the bottom of the screen completely free and it kinda seems like your left back is watching him, the obvious pass is to that player not the one the opp ends up making that takes out your entire back line, which i must say is very very high up the pitch, your centre backs are also a few yards deeper than the full backs and it gives that player the yard of space he needs. I dont really think, unless your keeper is a track sprinter, he would ever get to that its going out too wide. From there its just a case of him not expecting the kind of cross thats coming in, if he stays on his 6 yard box and its a high cross it prob goes over his head, if its a low cross he gets it. An annoying goal to lose, but i dont think its the keepers fault as such.

So by moving to a position that gives him next to a 0% chance of making a save from one where he has a better than 50% chance of gathering a cross he's not made a mistake & one that is repeated quite often under the current ME.

As for the sweeping up of the ball we've already covered that point & it is more than obvious that the ME does not treat the role correctly, as per my earlier post baaed on his starting position he wouldn't stand a chance of getting the ball but had he been in the correct covering position for the admittedly high line then he would have easily made the clearance.

To sum up that sequence;

Was it a good attacking goal? Yes
Were there flaws in my defence? Yes however I maintain that is a weakness of the ME & tactical interface with it's reliance on me issuing finite instructions to action a change in mentality late on, players should naturally be more cautions at this stage of the game.
Did the keeper make the wrong decision to move from the position he initially took up? Yes
With the decision to move taken should he have gone to his line or closed down the player on the ball? Close down, all day, every day.
Can we rationalise the decision he made? Just about but I'll come back with more of the same from other keepers in the game when dealing with crosses that traverse the 6 yard line or do not enter the 6 yard box.
Is the keeper in the wrong starting position in the first place? Yes & he always will be which is a flaw in the ME

Want to take a go at Wright's decision not to go for goal in the earlier clip?

As you now I'm not looking for a full scale tactical debate with advice on how to avoid this situation, my main point was to highlight issues surrounding GK's & that decision making consistently lacks any logic.

Another clip I uploaded shows a perfect example of a sweeper keeper not doing his job correctly despite SI's ascertain shortly after release that GK's were behaving as expected & in a realistic manner, simply put they are a key weakness in the ME as is general defending.

Here's the clip of my sweeper keeper doing exactly the opposite of what his role requires, the position is & always has been broken (ignore what my players are doing, for some reason the entire defence decided to ignore their set-piece & D-line position instructions).

No attributes of the guy who didnt run through on goal with the ball.
I wasnt going to offer you any tactical advice, your prob know more about that side of things than i do!
I cant watch the vids at work, but ill have a look at the other one on my lunch break.